From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-25 11:10:39
Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> Jeff Garland wrote:
>> Stefan Seefeld wrote:
>>> troy d. straszheim wrote:
>>> In boost itself libraries live next to each other (in terms of file system
>>> layout). Thus, a sandbox project could be looked at as a single library stored
>>> 'out-of-place'. The build system should support referring to an existing
>>> boost tree for the 'official boost' dependencies, such that the sandbox
>>> project only needs to provide new or updated files, but not a whole copy
>>> of boost-mainline.
>> This is a huge problem with the current sandbox organization. After spending
>> a couple hours the other day trying to get boost.build to work in the sandbox
>> tree I gave up in frustration and had to copy sandbox directories into my
>> boost tree to use bjam. This is very annoying to say the least.
> Is this a boost.build limitation ? What's the proper way to fix that ?
Making it work "seamlessly" is up to the individual library authors. I
was expecting that having a template for authors would fix most of these
problems. The usual arrangement with sandbox things is that one provides
a -sBOOST_ROOT=/some/path, and one can then build in the specific
sandbox project. I'll see if I can do some cleanups to make so of this
-- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk